Near Slayton, new solar energy system sets a record

Minneapolis-based Ecos Energy completed its two-megawatt solar system near Slayton, Minn., earlier this month. The project was built in partnership with Minneapolis-based Xcel Energy, which has agreed to buy power from it for 20 years. (Submitted photo: Ecos Energy)

The two-megawatt system, which was built outside Slayton, Minn., roughly 200 miles southwest of the Twin Cities, surpasses a 4,316-panel system completed at Ikea’s Bloomington store in late August.

The installation comes as state solar energy proponents prepare to push for legislative changes they say are needed to grow the industry in the coming years.

Production at the state’s largest operation will depend on the weather, but the Slayton project is capable of generating enough energy to power as many as 250 homes a year, according to Chris Little, a project manager with Minneapolis-based Ecos Energy.

Ecos Energy developed the project with the help of a $2 million grant from Minneapolis-based Xcel Energy’s Renewable Development Fund. Xcel signed a 20-year power purchase agreement to buy energy from the system, and plans to study its production patterns over the next year to see how solar energy could be used to help meet demand during peak periods.

Surrounded by three wind farms, the project is also designed to help learn how solar panels interact with energy produced by nearby wind farms.

Even without those results, the project will provide at least one significant advantage over other energy sources, Little said.

“We know what the price of solar is going to be in 10 years – it’s going to be free,” Little said Thursday. “I don’t think anyone out there can tell you what the price of natural gas or coal is going to be.”

For solar proponents, passing a new state standard that would require utilities in the state to get 10 percent of their energy from solar resources by 2030 is one of the chief goals.

To get there, proponents say a cap on the amount of energy utility’s purchase from smaller systems should be lifted, or replaced with a “buy all, sell all model,” which would allow residents or businesses with solar systems to sell power to a utility in exchange for a credit on their electric bill.

Ken Bradley, director of Environment Minnesota and chair of the Solar Works for Minnesota Coalition, said the primary objective behind the “buy all, sell all” approach is to replace a convoluted system with one that “makes logical sense.”

“In many ways, it’s a very simple solution to a very complicated set of rules,” he said.

Joel Cannon, chief executive at Bloomington-based tenKsolar, supports the moves and any other policy that removes obstacles for residents or businesses wanting to install solar power.

The company on Friday will cut the ribbon on its largest Minnesota project — a 200-kilowatt rooftop system at Lakeville’s Performance Office Paper’s manufacturing facility — which was done without state or utility subsidies.

Cannon said more projects like this would be possible, but that making it easier to access incentives would help stimulate additional activity.

“Minnesota still needs to catch up and make it easier for those who want to choose solar,” he said.

While such large systems grab most of the attention, Gary Shaver, president at Mountain Iron, Minn.-based solar manufacturer Silicon Energy, says small systems may be the most beneficial for the industry.

Not only can smaller systems be easily incorporated into the grid, but they also can be manufactured in the state and help keep the economic benefits closer to home, Shaver said.

“Big systems are not the way to go,” he said. “They’re great to brag about, but they’re not really the bright future for solar. The bright future for solar is going to be distributed generation,” which means smaller systems.

Silicon Energy, which launched in August 2011, produced technology for around 200 systems totaling one megawatt last year, but had to let people go as utility-funded incentives dried up. With the right approach, Shaver said, the company could do 10 times the amount of business it’s doing now.

As for Ecos Energy, the business behind the state’s largest solar project, its attention is shifting to other markets where the climate is more favorable.

Little, the project manager, said the company is planning three projects in California, including one equal to the size of its Slayton installation.

“Our focus right now is on the California market, simply because that’s where the opportunity is,” he said.

Solar and wind FUEL is free and ratepayers do pay. For example; Great River Energy financed a coal fired plant in North Dakota and it is too expensive to operate, at least until 2015 or when they can (also) finance their bio refinery. The wholesale cost of the coal plant is about 7.5 cents/kwhr. You can do wind, without federal subsidies for about 6 or 7 cents and it can be built here, in Minnesota.

While the cost of solar is expensive from a wholesale point of view, with federal investment incentives systems (tax breaks) can be constructed with paybacks of less than 10 years with no subsidies on the retail side. Distributed generation. This also negates the need for expensive transmission (GRE is planning about 2 billion dollars worth of transmission over the next few years. Many other utilities are planning similar investments).

My (MN) electric cooperative rates will rise in excess of 26% over the next 9 years without environmental reform which promise to jack rates up even higher. Existing rate projections has everything to do with the new coal investment (mentioned), maintenance on existing and old coal plants, construction of transmission infrastructure and likely natural gas pricing, which is forecast to increase substantially once demand kicks in due to coal to natural gas conversion, and global economies heat up.

In my view, tax breaks are not subsidies and those that like lower tax rates should be in favor of clean energy construction that provides lower taxes.

However, there are subsidies that will be sought by the solar industry to support businesses such as 10k which is a Minnesota business. Their cost to manufacture and supply panels are significantly higher than what can be purchased from other manufacturers, some of which come from China and Korea.

Short story is that bulk wholesale wind is cheaper than coal, return on investments through rooftop and community solar can be realized in less than 10 years. But, because of existing utility models, designed a 100 years ago (monopolies through territorial laws) business as usual will persist unless the state legislature can implement policy that facilitates more clean energy. It’s a hedge. Otherwise electricity costs will rise considerably.

Mama Bear; these are (somewhat) long sentences with complicated issues. It would be great if you actually delved deeper into the issues…rather than taking sides with what appears is a utility viewpoint. To be sure; they don’t care about rising rates their interest is protecting existing business models, their shareholders, and morph (GRE) into wholesale market sales. And it’s foolish for ratepayers not to be skeptical about utility interests, unless you like dirty energy and higher rates.

John, I question your logic. Sunlight and wind are free, that is true. However, the maintenance on the equipment is not. Also, no part will last forever. Particularly the computer controlled parts. They will last a long time, but how long is the payback? I don’t necessarily believe that bulk wholesale wind is cheaper than coal, but I can guarantee you that coal will produce electricity 24 hrs a day. This summer, when you turn your air conditioner on in the sweltering heat, take a look outside and see how much of a breeze you have. Chances are, not much on those 90 plus degree days. Here’s an exercise for you: Start trying shift your electrical use to coincide only when the wind is blowing. Like posting stuff on internet boards? Do it only when the wind blows. Like having lights in the house, a refrigerator keeping your food cool, air conditioner on, blower motor in your furnace? Now use those things only when the wind is blowing. And not just a slight breeze, either. A constant 5 mile an hour wind or more. That is why coal is currently the champion.

Of course, you are so good and knowledgeable about alternative energy, how come you didn’t mention anything about geothermal energy? Digging deep down inside the earth to heat a working fluid to 300 degree steam and spinning a turbine with it? That to me sounds like it could work 24 hrs a day, constantly. Certainly costly to dig down, however, you would be able to use the juice whenever you wanted or needed to.